Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020.02.24 Council Workshop PacketWorkshop Meeting AGENDA PASCO CITY COUNCIL 7:00 p.m. February 24, 2020 Page 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. ROLL CALL: (a) Pledge of Allegiance 3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS: 4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: 3 - 7 (a) Reimann Industrial Center 8 - 11 (b) Issuance of 2020 Revenue Bond and Refunding of Previous Bonds 12 - 30 (c) East Riverview Area Sewer Service and Development Policies 31 - 46 (d) Public Records Policy Updates 47 - 53 (e) PMC Amendments - Based on Code Publishing Recommendations 5. MISCELLANEOUS COUNCIL DISCUSSION: 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: 7. ADJOURNMENT: (a) REMINDERS: • Monday, February 24, 4:00 PM: Hanford Area Economic Investment Fund Advisory Committee Meeting – Ben Franklin Transit Main Conference Room (COUNCILMEMBER PETE SERRANO, Rep.) • Wednesday, February 26, 7:30 AM: Visit Tri-Cities Board Meeting – 7130 W. Grandridge Blvd., Kennewick (COUNCILMEMBER ZAHRA ROACH, Rep.; COUNCILMEMBER CRAIG Page 1 of 53 Workshop Meeting February 24, 2020 MALONEY, Alt.) • Wednesday, February 26, 12:00 PM: Tri-City Regional Chamber of Commerce Luncheon - State of the Ports - Three Rivers Convention Center (COUNCILMEMBERS) • Thursday, February 27, 4:00 PM: TRIDEC Board Meeting – 7130 W. Grandridge Blvd., Kennewick (COUNCILMEMBER DAVID MILNE, Rep.; COUNCILMEMBER CRAIG MALONEY. Alt.) • Thursday, February 27, 7:00 PM: Community Forum - HAPO Center at 6600 Burden Boulevard This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter/Spectrum Cable in Pasco and Richland and streamed at www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive. Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact the Clerk for assistance. Servicio de intérprete puede estar disponible con aviso. Por favor avisa la Secretaria Municipal dos días antes para garantizar la disponibilidad. (Spanish language interpreter service may be provided upon request. Please provide two business day's notice to the City Clerk to ensure availability.) Page 2 of 53 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 20, 2020 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 2/24/20 FROM: Rick White, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Reimann Industrial Center I. REFERENCE(S): Port of Pasco Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: Increased industrial development opportunities IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Recognizing the critical need for additional industrial land, including value added agricultural facilities, the Port of Pasco recently purchased approximately 300 acres north of the Pasco Processing Center for industrial development opportunities. The goal of the purchase and effort is to leverage the existing industrial cluster of food processing and related industries into a second heavy industrial area which will take advantage of the transportation and utilities network. Port staff will present the project benefits and estimated timeline for Council discussion. V. DISCUSSION: A portion of the subject property is currently outside of the City's current Urban Growth Area (UGA) however is included in the UGA expansion request and Draft Land Use Comprehensive Plan Update. Future development of the property will require continued coordination between the Port and the City in order to efficiently and Page 3 of 53 effectively provide needed infrastructure. Page 4 of 53 P o r t o f P a s c oPasco City Council February 24, 2020 Reimann Industrial Center Page 5 of 53 P o r t o f P a s c oHwy 395Reimann Industrial Center Proposed UGA Existing UGA Pasco Processing Center City of Pasco Reimann Industrial Center •300-acre property one-mile north of existing Pasco Processing Center. •Assets: Excellent access to Highway 395 and the BNSF rail network, natural gas on-site, and electrical transmission in place. •Vision: Replicate success of the Pasco Processing Center to create a second heavy industrial development to attract food processors and new industry targets. •Benefits: Inject more than $1.5 million in additional property taxes to benefit schools, local governments and create more than 1,000 new jobs in our region. •Schedule: Master Planning underway; Buildout projected at 20 years.Page 6 of 53 P o r t o f P a s c oPartnership Opportunities •Shared Vision for Economic Development •Joint Funding Requests, State & Federal •State Legislative Tools such as LRF •Infrastructure Development •Support for Water Reuse Facility Expansion •Shared Industry MarketingPage 7 of 53 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 19, 2020 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 2/24/20 FROM: Richa Sigdel, Director Finance SUBJECT: Issuance of 2020 Revenue Bond and Refunding of Previous Bonds I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed Project List Proposed Bond Schedule II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: New Bonds - Approximately $16,230,000 (PWRF improvements) to be issued. Debt service requirements to be met from revenue generated by utility user fees (Process Water Reuse Facility users). Refunding Existing Bonds - Approximately $9,100,000 (2009 and 2010 Water/Sewer Bonds). Debt service for this bond is currently met from revenue generated by utility user fees (Water and Sewer utility users). Once bonds are refunded (refinanced) the revenue generated by utility user fees will be continued to satisfy debt service. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: The Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) has been owned and operated by the City of Pasco since 1995. It processes wastewater from a variety of vegetable processing facilities located in Pasco. The PWRF consists of numerous mechanical components operating in a highly corrosive environment over the past quarter-century many of these components have worn out or are no longer capable of handling current and future demands. Further, in the 25 years since the facility was built, the technologies employed in and treatment of such waste streams has improved, and the ecological and environmental requirements from State and Federal regulatory agencies have tightened. The facility requires major rehabilitation, replacement and/or expansion of major mechanical components and systems. Page 8 of 53 All debt service related to the PWRF is paid by food processors as a part of yearly operational fees. Additionally, a large portion of this issue is intended to refund bonds previously issued by the City that have become "callable". Once callable, the City has the option to refinance a bond if more favorable terms exist in the market which is the case under the current circumstances. The bond financing team, consisting of senior staff and industry experts have evaluated the City's callable bonds and have identified opportunities for refinancing that will save the utility and its ratepayers' money though lower interest on current debt. V. DISCUSSION: The need for significant capital investment in the PWRF has been discussed with Council during the preparation of the 2019-2020 Biennial Budget, the subsequent mid- biennium adjustment, as well as the 2019-2024 and 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Plan adoptions. As planned and previously discussed, some of the projects on the bond lists are currently under construction. Staff was awaiting cost estimates and project schedules on projects that needed to be bundled in this bond issuance to optimize bond issuance costs. The City issued revenue bonds in 2009 and 2010 that are now eligible for refinancing. Based on current market factors, the bond financing team has identified $9,100,000 in outstanding debt that the City can refinance and will save close to $1,200,000 over the life of the bond in debt service costs. If approved, staff will advance the issuance of the bond and with an anticipated close in May 2020. Page 9 of 53 Project Name Description Maximum Amount Columbia East Force Main & Lift Station The Columbia East Lift Station portion of this project has been designed, is under construction and will be completed in 2019. The remainder of this project is for the design and construction of two force mains that will serve multiple food processors in the Commercial Avenue-Kahlotus Highway area and direct food process water (industrial waste) to the City's Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF). Three food processors will have use of this force main: Simplot RDO, Grimmway and Freeze Pack. This project will allow for the diversion of 1.5 MGD of industrial waste away from the municipal wastewater treatment plant and directed to the PWRF. $1,930,000 Foster Wells Force Main Construction. $4,000,000 Irrigation Pump Station The Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) includes an irrigation pump station (IPS). The existing IPS is in serious need of replacement due to deterioration to the point of multiple minor failures. If the current pump station were to have a major failure, there would be no way to pump the process water out of the facility to the crop fields. Complete shut down of all food processor partners would be needed until repairs could be made. This project was fully designed in 2019. $8,800,000 PWRF Primary Treatment Improvements This project will construct improvements to the Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) to allow for additional capacity and improved treatment of the food processors' industrial waste being pumped to the facility. This project will also address the odor issues that currently plague the facility. $1,500,000 PWRF Utility Bond $16,230,000      Page 10 of 53 11900 NE 1st Street, Suite 300 Bellevue, Washington 98005 City of Pasco, Washington Water and Sewer Improvement Refunding Revenue Bonds, 2020A Water and Sewer Improvement Revenue Bonds, 2020B (Taxable) Schedule of Events (February 7, 2020) DATE EVENT RESPONSIBILITY Complete Kick-off Call ALL Complete Data Request for Preliminary Official Statement (“POS”) Sent to the City BC Tue, Feb 18 Draft of Bond Ordinance Available BC Tue, Feb 25 Comments Due on Bond Ordinance ALL Tue, Feb 25 Data Request Returned to Bond Counsel City Mon, Mar 2 Draft of POS / Bond Ordinance Available BC Mon, Mar 9 Call / Meeting on Financing Documents ALL Wed Mar 11 Bond Ordinance Provided for Council Packets BC, City Mon, Mar 16 Draft of POS Available BC Mon, Mar 16 Council Meeting – Introduce Bond Ordinance City Mon, Mar 23 Comments Due on POS ALL Wed, Mar 25 Documents to S&P Global Ratings (Rating Agency) FA Week of Apr 6 Rating Call City, FA, UW Mon, Apr 6 Council Meeting – Approve Delegation Bond Ordinance City Publication of Bond Ordinance City Bond Ordinance Effective (5 Days after Publication) City Thu, Apr 16 Call to finalize POS / Due Diligence Call (Time TBD) ALL Thu, Apr 16 Receive Rating FA, City Fri, Apr 17 Post POS BC, UW Mon, Apr 27 Pre-Pricing Call (Time TBD) City, FA, UW Tue, Apr 28 Bond Sale ALL Tue, May 12 Closing ALL __________________________ City: City of Pasco BC: Bond Counsel (Foster Garvey PC) FA: Financial Advisor (NWMA) UW: Underwriter (D.A. Davidson) S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 30 JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL Page 11 of 53 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 18, 2020 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 2/24/20 FROM: Steve Worley, Director Public Works SUBJECT: East Riverview Area Sewer Service and Development Policies I. REFERENCE(S): Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: Long-term costs to tax and ratepayers are currently incalculable. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Pasco's Riverview area generally refers to the lands west of SR -395 and south of I-182 to the Columbia River. The provision of City-owned utilities, particularly sanitary sewer to a large subarea of the Riverview area, roughly bounded between Road 48, Road 80 and between Argent Road and Court Street is at question. Approximately 2/3rds of the aforementioned subarea lies within unincorporated Franklin County and is commonly referred to as the "doughnut hole". These unincorporated areas are generally not served with sanitary sewer, however most properties within the area are conditionally served with City water. Significant portions of the subject area are undeveloped or underdeveloped. The subarea is also at the geographic center of the City's Urban Growth Area as designated by Franklin County. The area enjoys proximity to multiple transportation corridors; I-182, Court Street, SR-395, Roads. 68 and 100, which affords area residents easy access to local and regional destinations. Development in the area has historically been sporadic and non-uniform ranging from half-acre lots to 5-acre and larger farms. Given its location, Franklin County's designation of the sub -area as being within Urban Growth Area, and the desire of several longtime residents living there that the area not urbanize, the subject of density has historically been controversial. Page 12 of 53 Development pressure in subarea area has been strong given the close proximity of commercial developments within the City and a shrinking inventory of vacant residential land that is zoned and suitable for development. As land within the current UGA continues to develop, pressure for urbanization of the subarea increases. Inefficient use of land and loosely regulated development of unincorporated areas within the UGA shifts immediate and long-term financial and quality of life burdens on current and future City residents, tax and ratepayers, particularly when those areas are surrounded by the City. Unmitigated impacts to parks, transportation systems and schools shifts the cost to address those impacts to others. Underdeveloped properties result in wider street and utility frontages with fewer tax/rate-payers available to pay for their maintenance and upkeep, fewer homes over an area result in less revenue to support police, fire and ambulance services, shifting that burden to others. When annexed it is common for property owners within urban areas, which were developed to rural standards, to want the City to add parks, upgrade roads, in stall street light s, construct safety improvements, address drainage problem and other provide or improve public amenities within the newly annexed area to an urban standard. The aforementioned has been the experience in Pasco and elsewhere. Substandard residential development, in terms of road standards continues to be permitted within the unincorporated UGA. Currently, residential developments in the unincorporated UGA of less than 20 lots are exempt from environmental review (SEPA) and as a result their impacts have historically gone unmitigated. For reference, 4 lots per acre is a common density for generously sized single family development and there remains much undeveloped land within the subarea that can accommodate development currently exempt from environmental review. Finally, a goal of the Growth Management Act, which Franklin County and the incorporated cities located within are bound by law to follow, is to minimize urban sprawl. If densities within the geographic center of the City's Urban Growth Area as designated by Franklin County are not increased, and development of the subarea is allowed to continue as has been the case, to accommodate future growth the City's UGA would need to be expanded an additional 200 acres beyond the request currently under review. The minimum lot size for single family development using an on-site septic system is one half an acre. The Growth Management Hearings Board generally views one quarter acre lots as appropriate within the UGA. For density to increase beyond two lots per acre sanitary sewer must be extended. For the reasons discussed above, staff has been evaluating how sanitary sewer could be introduced into the area. And has also been working with County staff in an effort to meet our common goal of assuring that new development is consistent with the long- range planning for the subarea and the overall UGA. Page 13 of 53 With respect to the extension of sanitary sewer, based on topography, sanitary sewer service to the subarea is most efficiently accomplished by dividing the subarea into two drainage basins; the West Basin (roughly Road 72 to Road 80) and the East Basin (Road 48 to Road 72). This approach was established in the current Comprehensive Sewer System Plan and previously discussed with Council. While this presentation is focused on the East Basin, the issues discussed apply to the West basin as well. On August 23,2018, staff presented a conceptual sewer service layout to begin the discussion on whether the City should consider the development of Local Improvement District (LID), to fund the design and construction of the sanitary sewer lift stations in order to serve future development of the East and West Basins. At that time, Council expressed interest in further investigating this concept. In early 2019, staff selected a consultant, RH2 Engineering Inc.(RH2), to assist in this analysis. In the ensuing months, staff and RH2 have developed alternatives to be presented tonight. Along with this analysis, staff identified policy decisions that are directly tied to the successful implementation of the sewering of this area to achieve Council's goals. V. DISCUSSION: The southeast corner of Road 52 and Pearl Street is identified as the optimum location for a lift station to serve the East Riverview basin due to elevation and is property owned by the City. The alternatives evaluated for sewer service of the East Riverview area are: • Alternative 1: Small Basin This basin extends 94 acres and is located mostly in the unincorporated area. This alternative includes a small basin within 1,000 ft. of the lift station. This alternative essentially meets the needs of the City park and adjacent properties. If other portions of the East Riverview basin were to develop, larger and deeper infrastructure would be necessary. Alternative 1 is only recommended if there is a near-term need to serve the properties adjacent to the lift station and there is no desire to plan or design for future basin service or expansion. Ultimately, facilities installed in this alternative would not be reusable if the service area is expanded much further than the 1,000 ft. limits. • Alternative 2: Intermediate Basin Covers 358 acres. This basin is located partially within city limits. This alternative assumes near-term basin, extending West to Road 60, but recommends installing sewer infrastructure at a depth to facilitate future basin expansion to the West of Road 60. Slightly smaller infrastructure was included Page 14 of 53 within Alternative 2 compared to Alternative 3, based on the assumption that the entire basin may not reach “build-out” density in the foreseeable future, and therefore the sewer infrastructure can be slightly smaller. The lift station equipment will likely need to be replaced b y the time the build-out density is approached. Alternative 2 has the ability to serve any individual parcel in the entire basin via gravity, but it is not capable of serving the entire basin without some modifications, should every lot need sewer service or development to its full potential in the future. • Alternative 3: Built-out basin This alternative is capable of serving full build-out of entire Road 52 and Pearl Street Basin: 639 acres. • Two Investment recuperation methods are considered for these improvements: • Local Improvement District • Latecomers Agreement, Special connection fee or combination The construction of a lift station to provide sewer service to the East Riverview area must be considered in conjunction with other policies and align with all of the Council's adopted goals as the issues here cut across numerous aspects impacting the entire community. On this subject, the presentation approaches the need to make or reinforce policy decisions. initiativesdevelopment forward brings Staff the in consideration for unincorporated Urban Growth Areas (UGAs), such as: • with standards development joint for Interlocal an Adopting Agreement Franklin County or insist on the consistent application of the County's currently adopted urban standard within the UGA. • Reinforce the extension of City water to properties within the unincorporated Riverview subarea be conditioned on consistency with the with the long-term plans and policies of the City. • Two of the statutory Goals of the Growth Management Act are to (1) “Guide urban growth to areas where urban services can be adequately provided” and (2) “Reduce urban sprawl.” Allowing residential development to occur in the UGA using on-site septic and substandard infrastructure directly contradicts those two Goals. Towards that end – a minimum density standard should be considered. Below are two of the City’s suggestions to Franklin County during their 2019 update of the County-wide Planning Policies (these suggested policies were not included in the f inal adopted County-wide Policies): Within the Pasco UGA there should be a minimum density achieved of at Density Low in the acre 4 units dwelling least per land use designation; at least 6 units per acre in the Mixed Residential land use Page 15 of 53 designation and at least 10 units per acre in the High Density land use designation unless the underlying Comprehensive Plan Land Use designations allows greater density minimums. For those properties within yet but area, Riverview not outside and UGA the the incorporated and unserved by municipal water and sewer, the maximum density should be one dwelling unit per five acres. Within the Pasco UGA the extension of the municipal water service will occur only with concurrent extension of municipal sewer service. Staff recommends that the above polices be implemented to the greatest extent the within extension utility City conditions using possible for unincorporated UGA • Encourage Franklin County to reduce their current threshold for exemption from SEPA review. The introduction of sewer to an area such as the Riverview subarea invites considerable policy discussion and is expensive in terms of initial capital outlay, however, perhaps significantly less so in many ways than allowing status substandard development within the heart of the UGA. RH2 representatives and City staff will present on these topics. Page 16 of 53 Pasco City Council Workshop February 24, 2020 Page 17 of 53 Overall Sewer System Page 18 of 53 Road 52 and Pearl Street Lift Station Project #19053 East sub-basin of the Riverview area Meets the Council Goal: Quality of Life Supports by ensuring wastewater infrastructure is in place REFERENCE Basin limits City CountyPage 19 of 53 Basin Recent Development Page 20 of 53 Alternatives Evaluation Alternative 1 Smallest basin Alternative 2 Intermediate basin Serves east of Road 60 Designed to serve any individual parcel in the entire basin Assumes full basin does not reach build-out Alternative 3 Built-Out, or ‘fully developed’ basin Allows access for future connections as residents transition from septic to sewerPage 21 of 53 Alternative 1 REFERENCE PHASE 1 Lift Station Force main PHASE 2 (as development occurs) Trunk Mains Page 22 of 53 Alternative 2 REFERENCE PHASE 1 Lift Station Force main PHASE 2 (as development occurs) Trunk Mains Page 23 of 53 Alternative 3 REFERENCE PHASE 1 Lift Station Force main PHASE 2 (as development occurs) Trunk Mains Page 24 of 53 Cost Considerations Description Alternative 1 (Small Basin) Alternative 2 (Intermediate Basin) Alternative 3 (Entire Basin) Phase 1 Probable Construction Cost Estimate $1,110,000 $1,940,000 $2,050,000 ERUs 227 801 1,481 Cost Estimate per ERU Served $4,900 $2,500 $1,400Page 25 of 53 Investment Recuperation Mechanisms Utility Local Improvement District (ULID) •All property owners in area are assessed. •Requires extensive public relations and the support of the property owners. Utility Latecomer Agreements •City pays all project costs •Property owners only assessed when development and connection to system occurs. Page 26 of 53 Policy Issue City/County Joint Development Agreement for UGA areas Page 27 of 53 Current Policy Development in Unincorporated UGA areas •City water and sewer service: •Must meet City Street Standards (width, curb/gutter/sidewalk, bike lanes, etc.) •Must meet County ‘Urban Standard’ for roads •Sewer and Water Extensions to property required at time of land subdivision (Plat, Short Plat, etc.) •Exception for single-family home connection •Latecomer Agreements available to help Developer Cost Page 28 of 53 Policy Issue Development in Unincorporated UGA areas •Establish minimum Density requirement •Allows for more efficient use of land •Lessens sprawl in other parts of the community •Provides more efficient use of public infrastructure •Lesser cost Page 29 of 53 Pasco City Council Workshop February 24, 2020 Page 30 of 53 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 19, 2020 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Zach Ratkai, Administrative & Community Services Director Workshop Meeting: 2/24/20 FROM: Debby Barham, City Clerk Administrative & Community Services SUBJECT: Public Records Policy Updates I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed Resolution & Public Records Policy II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Resolution No. 3460, last updated the Public Records Policy in March 2013. There have been continual revisions with the Washington State Public Records Act since 2013 and the City of Pasco's Public Records Policy needs to reflect those updates. As stated within the proposed resolution, the Public Records Policy will be moved under the City of Pasco's Administrative Orders (AO) as this will allow staff to maintain and update the policy on an ongoing basis as state laws and best practices change related to the City's records including public records requests, records retention and records disposition. The most notable updates within the proposed Public Records Policy include: • Addition of fees for electronic records per RCW 42.56.120 (2)(iii, iv and v) • Addition of Body Worn Camera (BWC) records description, fees associated with BWC records, waivers of fees, etc. per RCW 42.56.240 and 42.56.050 • Addition of Public Records Retention language - following the Washington Page 31 of 53 State Archivist’s Retention Schedules unless the City determines that the records will be maintained beyond the State’s minimum retention per RCW 40.14 • Additional language about “Duplicate Requests” and how to respond to such requests • Additional language about “Notice to Third Parties” • Additional language about “No Duty to Create Records” • Additional language about “No Duty to Supplement Responses” for requests already closed • Addition of a link to the Code Reviser's website that provides the most up-to- date list of records “Exempt from Public Disclosure” per RCW 42.56.070(2) The Public Records Policy will continue to be accessible to the public on the City's website and at the City Clerk's Office as required by law per RCW 42.56.040. V. DISCUSSION: Page 32 of 53 RESOLUTION NO. _____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 3460 REGARDING PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS AND REPLACING IT WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PUBLIC RECORDS POLICY THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER. WHEREAS, the City of Pasco previously adopted the Washington State Attorney General’s advisory rules as Resolution No. 3267, and subsequent amendments through Resolutions No. 3446 and No. 3460; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature has passed updates to Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 42.56 Public Records Act, via ESHB 1594 and EHB 1595 in 2017-2018 as well as other legislation; and WHEREAS, the City finds it necessary to update its disclosure and disposition procedures consistent with the legislative changes, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: Section 1. Records Index. The City finds that maintaining an index is unduly burdensome and would interfere with City operations. The requirement would unduly burden or interfere with City operations in the following ways: 1) Given the number of different departments/divisions in the City, the maintenance of a single index is impractical; and 2) Due to activity levels in the City, the type and number of records is constantly changing. Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to institute the Public Records Policy, and furthermore, authorized to amend such administrative policies and practices as necessary and appropriate. The Public Records Policy shall be readily available to the public at City Hall and on the City’s website and is attached hereto as EXHIBIT A. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, at its regular meeting on the ____ day of _______, 2020. Saul Martinez Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorney Page 33 of 53 P a g e | 1 CITY OF PASCO ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER Administrative Order No. Administrative and Community Service Subject: Public Records Policy Initial Effective Date: March ___, 2020 Revised Approved Authority provided to the City Manager through Resolution No. ____, approved by Council on ____________. I. PURPOSE: This Order is necessary in order to update uniform rules and procedures regarding the City of Pasco’s Public Records Policy, previously defined and adopted by Resolution No. 3460. II. DEPARTMENTS AFFECTED: All. III. POLICY: The purposes of this policy are to: (1) describe the organization of the City; and (2) comply with Chapter 42.56 RCW, the Public Records Act. Except where these guidelines are mandated by statute, the guidelines in this policy are discretionary and advisory only and shall not impose any affirmative duty on the City. The City reserves the right to apply and interpret this policy as it deems necessary, and to revise or change the policy at any time. This policy shall be available at City Hall and posted on the City’s Website. IV. PROCEDURES: 1. AGENCY DESCRIPTION - PUBLIC RECORDS OFFICER - CONTACT INFORMATION. A) Agency Description. The City of Pasco is a Washington Municipal Corporation providing municipal services. The City’s central office is located at the Pasco City Hall, located at 525 North 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA. B) Public Records Officer. Any person wishing to request access to public records or seeking assistance in making a request, should contact the City’s Public Records Officer. The City Manager has designated the City Clerk as the City’s Public Records Page 34 of 53 P a g e | 2 Officer pursuant to RCW 42.56.580. While the Public Records Officer may offer help and guidance relating to any public records request, requests for police records, fire & emergency medical services incident records, and municipal court records should be directed to the designated records officer within those departments. The contact information is listed below. C) Contact Information. The Public Records Requests webpage provides details on how and where to submit a public records request. The webpage is located at https://www.pasco- wa.gov/193/Public-Records-Requests or Google “City of Pasco Public Records.” 1) Requests for General and Police Body Worn Camera records. Requests to inspect or copy records should be made to the City Clerk’s Office using the on-line public records request portal (NextRequest) or at the information provided below. For questions regarding the online portal, contact the City Clerk’s Office: City Clerk’s Office City of Pasco 525 North 3rd Ave., Pasco WA 99301 Telephone: (509) 544-3096 Facsimile: (509) 543-5727 Email: cityclerkPRR@pasco-wa.gov 2) Requests for Police records. Requests to inspect or copy records maintained by the City’s Police Department, with the exception of Body Worn Camera records, should be made to the Police Records Officer at: Records Office City of Pasco Police Department 215 W Sylvester St., Pasco WA 99301 Telephone: (509) 545-3421 Facsimile: (509) 545-3423 Email: records@pasco-wa.gov 3) Requests for Fire and Emergency Medical Services Incident records. Requests to inspect or copy records for fire and emergency medical services incidents, maintained by the City’s Fire Department should be made to the department at: Fire Administration City of Pasco Fire Department 310 North Oregon Ave., Pasco WA 99301 Telephone: (509) 545-3426 Facsimile: (509) 543-5717 Email: pascofire@pasco-wa.gov Page 35 of 53 P a g e | 3 4) Requests for Municipal Court records. Requests to inspect or copy records maintained by the Pasco Municipal Court, should be made to the Court Administrator at: Municipal Court Administration City of Pasco 1016 North 4th, Pasco WA 99301 Telephone: (509) 545-3491 Facsimile: (509) 545-3494 Email: municipalcourtPRR@pasco-wa.gov 5) Internet access to records: Many of the City’s public records are available on the City’s website at www.pasco-wa.gov. Requestors are encouraged to view the documents available on the website prior to submitting a public records request. D) Compliance with the Public Records Act. The Public Records Officer will oversee compliance with the Public Records Act, but another City staff member may process a request once received. Therefore, these rules will refer to the Public Records Officer “or designee.” The Public Records Officer or designee and the City will provide the fullest assistance to requestors, ensure that public records are protected from damage or disorganization, and prevent the amount of time spent fulfilling public records requests from causing excessive interference with essential functions of the City. 2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC RECORDS. A) Hours for inspection of records. Public records are available for inspection and copying during normal business hours of the City. 1) The City Clerk’s Office, Police Department and Fire Department hours are Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., excluding legal holidays. 2) The Municipal Court hours are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., and 1:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding legal holidays. B) Organization of records. The City will maintain its records in a reasonably organized manner consistent with available resources. Pursuant to RCW 42.56.070(4), the City of Pasco has determined that development and maintenance of a current index of all public records as required by RCW 42.56.070(3) is unduly burdensome. See City of Pasco Resolution No. ____. C) Retention of Records. The City is not required to retain all records it creates or uses. However, the City will follow RCW Chapter 40.14, Preservation and Destruction of Public Records, in the retention and destruction of public records. The Secretary of State, State Archives Committee approves a general retention schedule for local agency records (including cities) that is common to most agencies. Individual agencies may seek approval from the Local Records Committee for retention schedules specific to Page 36 of 53 P a g e | 4 their agency or that, due to their particular business needs, must be kept longer than provided in the general schedule. The local agencies retention schedule is available at www.secstate.wa.gov/archives. Retention schedules for documents vary based on the content of the record. WAC 44- 14-03005. D) Making a request for public records. 1) A public records request must be for identifiable record(s). A request for all or substantially all records prepared, owned, used, or retained by an agency is not a valid request for identifiable records. A variety of public records are available on the City’s website at www.pasco-wa.gov. Requesters are encouraged to view the public records currently available on the website at no charge prior to submitting a records request. Requesters are strongly encouraged to use the applicable public records request forms available at the offices identified in the Contact Information (1.C. as written above) or utilizing the online Public Records Requests Portal (Next Request) located on the City of Pasco’s website: www.pasco-wa.gov/publicrecords. Requests may be made online, in person, by letter, or e-mail addressed to the Public Records Officer and include the following information: a) Name of requestor (optional); b) Company/Organization (optional); c) Contact information, either a telephone number, mailing address, and/or e-mail address (required in order to respond to the request); and d) Description of “identifiable” the public records adequate for the Public Records Officer or designee to locate the records. 2) Requests submitted by mail addressed to the Public Records Officer will be deemed received on the date received by the City. Requests submitted electronically to the Public Records Officer will be deemed received on the date it is received, but requests received after the close of business will be deemed received on the next business day. 3) If the requestor wishes to have copies of the records instead of simply inspecting them, fees may apply depending on the type and format of responsive records. Refer to the Fees Schedule for details, Section 5. COSTS OF PROVIDING COPIES OF PUBLIC RECORDS. 4) In the event the records requested in any department are readily available, of a routine nature, and do not involve the interest of any other person, the Public Records Officer or the department head may authorize the immediate inspection and/or copying of such record without the necessity of filing the request as provided in 2(D)(1). Page 37 of 53 P a g e | 5 3. PROCESSING OF PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST - GENERAL. A) Providing Fullest Assistance. The City is charged by statute with adopting rules which provide how it will “provide full access to public records,” “protect records from damage or disorganization,” “prevent excessive interference with other essential functions of the City,” provide “fullest assistance” to requestors, and provide the “most timely possible action” on public records requests. The Public Records Officer or designee will process requests in the order allowing the most requests to be processed in the most efficient manner. B) Response. Within five (5) business days of receiving a public records request, the Public Records Officer or designee will respond by doing one or more of the following: 1) Make the record(s) available, in whole or part, for inspection or copying; 2) Acknowledge the request and provide a reasonable estimate of time required by the City to respond to the request; 3) Acknowledge the request and ask the requestor to provide clarification for a request that is unclear, and provide, to the greatest extent possible, a reasonable estimate of time necessary to respond to the request if it is not clarified; or 4) Deny the Records Request.  The City may deny a request, in whole or part, and provide the legal basis for such denial.  The City may also deny an automatically generated (“bot”) request that is one of multiple requests received from the same Requestor within a 24-hour period, if the City establishes that responding to the multiple requests would cause excessive interference with the other essential functions of the City. A "bot" request means a records request that the City reasonably believes was automatically generated by a computer program or script. NOTE: In computing time, the day on which the request is received does not count as one of the five business days. Holidays and weekends are also excluded from the calculation of time. RCW 1.12.040. C) Large Requests. When a public records request is for a large volume of records, the Public Records Officer may elect to provide records on an installment basis if he or she reasonably determines that it would be practical to provide the records in that way. If a requester does not contact the Public Records Officer or designee to arrange for the review of any installment within thirty (30) days of notice of review, the City may deem the request abandoned, stop fulfilling the remainder of the request, and close the request. The City may fulfill smaller requests received after a large request prior to fulfilling the large request. Page 38 of 53 P a g e | 6 The Public Records Officer or designee may use the following criteria and method for identifying large or complex requests. Such criteria and method may be amended from time to time as the demand for records and the availability of resources change. The Public Records Officer or designee may consider the following criteria when identifying large or complex requests: (1) the general, expansive, or all-inclusive nature of the request; (2) the number of departments involved; (3) the location of records and available method of searching records; (4) the potential number of records implicated; (5) the rights of third parties; (6) the need for clarification of the request; (7) administrative tasks necessary to process the request; (8) the amount of time needed to review documents for applicable exemptions; (9) the need for legal review of the public records request; (10) the format of relevant records; and (11) other relevant circumstances. The method for applying the criteria in reviewing the requests shall be the use of the Public Records Request Evaluation Sheet, attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Public Records Officer or designee shall score those requests, which appear to be potentially large or complex by using the Public Records Request Evaluation Sheet. A request that scores 8 points or less shall be considered a Routine request, and will be processed together with other Routine requests in the order such requests were received. A request that scores 9 points or greater shall be considered Large or Complex, and will be processed together with other Large or Complex requests in the order such requests were received. In the event the records requested in any department are readily available, of a common nature, and do not involve the interest of any other person, the public records officer or the department head may authorize the immediate inspection and/or copying of such record without the necessity of filing the request as provided in subsection 2(D)(1) above. 1) Requestors are encouraged to narrow or clarify large or complex requests. A request that is narrowed or clarified will be rescored to determine if the request qualifies as Routine and can otherwise be processed with the other pending Routine requests. Requestors are encouraged to consider the needs of others and utilize the public records request process responsibly. 2) A requestor may appeal the determination that a request is Large or Complex to the City Manager or designee by providing a written request for review of the determination to the City Manager's office within ten (10) business days of the determination. A written decision shall be issued by the City Manager or designee within five (5) business days from receipt of the appeal unless extended or waived by mutual written agreement. D) Notice to Third Parties. If a public record contains information affecting an individual or organization other than the person who requested the public record, the City may notify that individual or organization to allow the third party to seek relief pursuant to RCW 42.56.540, unless notice is required by law. The notice to the affected persons or organizations will include a copy of the request. Third parties shall be given 15 business Page 39 of 53 P a g e | 7 days to obtain and provide to the City an order from the court preventing or limiting disclosure. Nothing in this policy is intended to create any right to such notice. E) Duplicate Requests; Different Timeframe. When a requestor makes multiple public records requests for the same identifiable records but for different timeframes, the City may, in the City’s discretion, combine the requests into one public records request. F) No Duty to Create Records. The City is not obligated to answer written questions, create new public records, or provide a record in a format different from the original format of the record; however, the City may, in its discretion, offer to create such a record to fulfill a request where it may be easier for the City to create a record responsive to the request than to collect and make available voluminous records. G) No Duty to Supplement Responses. The City is not obligated to hold current records requests open to respond to requests for records that may be created in the future. A new request must be made to obtain later-created public records. H) Reference to Website. The City may fulfill requests by providing a link to the records published on the City’s public website. I) Unclear Requests. If a public record request is vague or otherwise unclear, the City shall request clarification from the requestor for any portion that is unclear, in accordance with Section 3(B) (3) above. If the requestor fails to clarify the request within 10 business days, the City may deem the unclear portion of the request as having been abandoned, but shall continue to prepare a response to any clear portions of the request in accordance with RCW 42.56. J) Records Exempt from Disclosure. After the City Staff has gathered responsive records, the Public Records Officer or designee, and in some incidences in conjunction with the City Attorney’s Office, shall determine whether an exemption applies to all or part of the record. If the City believes that a record is exempt from disclosure and should be withheld, the Public Records Officer will state the specific exemption and provide a brief explanation of why the record or a portion of the record is being withheld. If only a portion of a record is exempt from disclosure, but the remainder is not exempt, the Public Records Officer will redact the exempt portions, provide the nonexempt portions, and indicate to the requestor why portions of the record are being redacted. The City need not make available for inspection and copying public records exempt from public inspection and copying under Chapter 42.56 RCW and other records exempt from public inspection and copying under State or Federal statute or regulation. Here is the link to the list of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) public disclosure exemptions prepared the Code Reviser’s Office: Public Disclosure Exemptions. K) Privilege Log. If the City determines that a record is exempt and should be withheld, the City will maintain a privilege log of applicable withheld records. The privilege log will identify: Page 40 of 53 P a g e | 8 1) Type of record withheld. 2) Date of record. 3) Number of pages. 4) Author or recipient, unless their identity is exempt. 5) The exemption invoked. 6) A brief explanation describing how the exemption applies. A copy of the privilege log will be provided to the requestor. L) Inspection of Records. 1) Consistent with other demands, the City shall promptly provide a location at City Hall to inspect public records. The requestor may not remove a record from the viewing area or disassemble or alter any records. No fee shall be charged for the inspection of public records. The requestor shall indicate which documents, if any, he or she wishes the City to copy. 2) The requestor must claim or review the assembled records within thirty (30) days of the City's notification to him or her that the records are available for inspection or copying. The City will notify the requestor in writing of this requirement and inform the requestor that he or she should contact the City to make arrangements to claim or review the records. If the requestor or a representative of the requestor fails to claim or review the records within the thirty-day (30) period or make other arrangements, the City may close the request and refile the assembled records. Other public records requests can be processed ahead of a subsequent request by the same person for the same or almost identical records, which can be processed as a new request. M) Providing Copies of Records. Upon request, and after payment of any required deposit or fees, the Public Records Officer or designee will provide copies or arrange for copying of public records. Refer to Section 5, Costs of Providing Copies of Public Records. N) Completion of Inspection and/or Release of Records. When the inspection of the responsive records is complete and all responsive copies are provided to the requester, the Public Records Officer or designee will indicate that the City has completed a diligent search for the requested records and has made the nonexempt records available for inspection and/or release. A written notification will be provided to the requestor that the request has been completed and closed. Page 41 of 53 P a g e | 9 O) Closing Withdrawn or Abandoned Requests. The Public Records Officer or designee will close the request and notify the requestor in writing that the City has closed the request when the requestor either: 1) Withdraws the request; 2) Fails to fulfill his or her obligations to inspect the records; 3) Fails to pay the 10% deposit; 4) Fails to pay the required fees for an installment; or 5) Fails to make final payment for the requested copies. P) Later Discovered Documents. If, after the City has informed the requestor that it has provided all available records, the City becomes aware of additional responsive records existing at the time of the request, it will promptly inform the requestor of the additional records and provide them on an expedited basis. 4. REQUESTS TRACKING LOG. A) The City shall log the following for all public records requests: 1) Identity of Requestor, if provided. 2) Date the request was received. 3) The text of the original request. 4) Description of records produced in response to request. 5) Description of records redacted or withheld and the reasons for redaction and/or withholding. 6) Date of final disposition of the request. The City shall maintain such Public Records Requests Tracking Log in accordance with the retention schedule under RCW 40.14 5. COSTS OF PROVIDING COPIES OF PUBLIC RECORDS. A) No costs for inspecting. There is no fee for inspecting public records, including inspecting records published on a public City website. Page 42 of 53 P a g e | 10 B) Actual costs. Except where provided in this section, the City finds that calculating actual costs for providing copies of public records for every public records request would be unduly burdensome. The City does not have significant resources, and the cost and effort that would be expended when calculating actual costs would interfere with City operations. C) Charges for Copies. Per RCW 42.56.120, the City will charge one or more of the following charges for copies: 1) Fifteen cents (15¢) per page for standard (8 ½ inch x 11 inch or 8 ½ inch x 14 inch) black-and-white copies or for the use of City equipment to make standard black- and-white copies; 2) Ten cents (10¢) per page for any paper records that are scanned so they can be produced in electronic format or for the use of City equipment for scanning. 3) Five cents (5¢) for every four electronic files or attachments uploaded to an email, cloud storage service, or other electronic delivery system. 4) Ten cents (10¢) per gigabyte for the transmission of public records in an electronic format or for the use of agency equipment to send the records electronically. The agency shall take reasonable steps to provide the records in the most efficient manner available to the agency in its normal operations. 5) The actual cost of any digital storage media or device provided by the agency, the actual cost of any container or envelope used to mail the copies to the requestor, and the actual postage or delivery charge. 6) The actual cost of copying and taxes actually charged by any third-party vendor used to make copies of specialized records such as maps, plan, blue-prints, etc. The Public Records Officer may elect to waive these fees. Fees will be waived when the expense of billing exceeds the cost of copying and postage. If a requestor asks the City to provide an estimate of charges before copies are made, the City must provide such an estimate. The requestor must then be given the opportunity to revise their request to reduce the charges. 8) Body Worn Camera Records Fees. a. Per RCW 42.56.240(14)(e), the standard fee for body worn camera records video redaction costs shall be an hourly staff rate of $41.80 as of January 1, 2020. A 10% deposit is required prior to the request (or installment of the request) is processed. b. Pursuant to RCW 42.56.240(14)(e), waiver of the Body Worn Camera Records fee may occur when: Page 43 of 53 P a g e | 11 1. The requester is a person directly involved in the recorded incident. The requester is required to provide Photo ID with the request. 2. The requester is the attorney representing a person directly involved with the recorded incident. 3. The requester is the person, or his or her attorney, requesting the video relevant to his/her criminal case. The requester is required to provide Photo ID with the request. 4. The requester is the executive director of the Washington State commission on African-American affairs, Asian Pacific American affairs or Hispanic affairs. 5. The requester is the attorney representing a person regarding a potential or existing civil cause of action involving the denial of civil rights under the federal or state constitution, or violation of a United States Department of Justice settlement agreement, and seek relief from redaction costs. D) Deposit and Full Payment. Before beginning to make the copies, the Public Records Officer or designee may require a deposit of up to ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of copying all the records selected by the requestor. The Public Records Officer or designee may also require the payment of the remainder of the copying cost before providing all the records, or the payment of the cost of copying an installment before providing that installment. The City will not charge sales tax when it makes copies of public records. E) Payment. Payment may be made by cash, check, money order or debit card to the City. When necessary, payment should be made payable to the order of The City of Pasco. F) Costs for specialized services. In the event the City is required due to the size of the records or when there is a need for specialized copying equipment (i.e., photographs, blueprints, taped or video recordings) to use the services of an outside source designated by the City, the requestor shall be required to pay the actual costs of such service, including delivery and return of public records for the purpose of copying. 1) Before the City may expend any specialized services costs or assess those costs, the City must notify the requestor of the specialized service charge to be applied to the request, including an explanation of why the specialized service charge applies, a description of the specific expertise, and a reasonable estimate of the charge. The notice must also provide the requestor the opportunity to amend his or her request in order to avoid or reduce the cost of a specialized service charge. G) Costs of mailing. The City may also charge actual costs of mailing or postage (including the costs of the shipping container) and the actual costs of long-distance facsimile transmission. Page 44 of 53 P a g e | 12 6. REVIEW OF DENIALS OF PUBLIC RECORDS. A) Petition for Internal Administrative Review of Denial of Access. Any person who objects to the initial denial or partial denial of a records request may petition in writing (including e-mail) to the Public Records Officer for a review of that decision. The petition shall include a copy of, or reasonably identify, the written statement by the Public Records Officer or designee denying the request. B) Consideration of Petition for Review. The Public Records Officer shall promptly provide the petition and any other relevant information to the City Attorney. The City Attorney will immediately consider the petition and either affirm or reverse the denial within two (2) business days following the City's receipt of the petition, or within such other time as the City and the requestor shall mutually agree upon. The comments incorporated in WAC, Chapter 44-14 may be relied upon as authority for determinations made by the City in applying or interpreting this Administrative Order. C) Alternative Dispute Resolution. In the event of a dispute regarding the inspection or copying of public records, the parties are encouraged to first meet in a good faith attempt to resolve the dispute by agreement of the parties or by mediation. In the event the dispute remains, the dispute can be resolved by arbitration pursuant to RCW Chapter, 7.04A, the Mandatory Rules of Arbitration, as amended, and venue being placed in Franklin County, Washington. D) Judicial Review. Any person may obtain court review of denials of public records requests pursuant to RCW 42.56.550 at the conclusion of two (2) business days after the initial denial, regardless of any internal administrative appeal. V. REFERENCES: Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter 42.56 (Public Records Act); Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 44-14 (Public Records Act – Model Rules) provides direction and assistance regarding Requests for Public Records; and RCW Chapter 40.14 (Preservation and Destruction of Public Records). Page 45 of 53 P a g e | 13 Public Records Request Evaluation Sheet Score Weight Measurement Criteria (1) General, Expansive or all-inclusive nature of request 0 Specific documents, records identified 1 Records generally identified 2 Records Unidentified (2) Number of departments involved 0 Records in one Department or Division 1 Records in two or three Departments or Divisions 2 Records in more than three Departments or Divisions (3) Location of available / relevant records 0 Records in active files 0 Records in searchable database 1 Records in archive files 1 Records must be searched in individal locations (4) Potential number of records implicated 0 Less than 10 documents (not pages) 1 More than 10, less than 50 documents 3 More than 50 less than 500 documents 5 Greater than 500 documents (5) Third party notifications 0 No notifications 1 Notifications (6) Need for clarification 0 No clarification needed 1 Clarification needed (7) Administrative tasks needed to process request 1 Interpretation 1 Search Hard Copy 0 Search electronic Copy 2 Metadata 1 Search Other 1 File prep for photograph, Scan 1 Burning CD/DVD or Outsourcing Production 0 File prep for electronic production (8) Time needed for review for exemptions 0 No review time 1 Review time less than 2 hours 2 Greater than 2 hours, less than 10 hours 3 Greater than 10 hours (9) Legal review required 0 No legal review required 1 Legal review required (10) Other Relevant Factors Total Score EXHIBIT A Page 46 of 53 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 19, 2020 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 2/24/20 FROM: Eric Ferguson, Attorney Executive SUBJECT: PMC Amendments - Based on Code Publishing Recommendations I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed Ordinance II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: In 2018, the City of Pasco contracted with Code Publishing Company to re-codify and host the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) on an on-going basis. As a part of the re- codification process, Code Publishing also performed a legal review of the PMC and reviewed all sections of the PMC for consistency, archaic language, internal conflicts, as well as compliance with state and federal laws. A detailed report was provided to the City Attorney after the completion of the review. The City Attorney and his staff have completed its review of the report and the proposed code amendments within the attached ordinance. This the second of five such ordinances to bring the PMC up to standards in terms of removing conflicting text and meeting the requirements of state and federal laws. The first ordinance was adopted at the February 18.2020 Council meeting. V. DISCUSSION: Page 47 of 53 Omnibus Ordinance - 1 ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN OMNIBUS ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTIONS 9.100.070, 9.100.100, 9.100.120, 9.100.130, 9,100.140, 9.100.150, 9.100.160, 9.100.170, 9.100.180, 9.100,190, 9.100.200, 9.100.220, 9.100.230, 9.100.240, 9.100.260, 9.100.270 OF THE PASCO MUNICIPAL CODE UPDATING AND CLARIFYING PARK CODE PROVISIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, the Municipal Code for the City of Pasco has recently undergone a comprehensive re-codification and review for consistency and clarity of text; and WHEREAS, in working through the re-codification and review, certain code provisions were deemed to be in need of clarification so text was consistent with other provisions and intended purposes were plainly understood. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 9.100.070, entitled “Posting signs” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.070 Posting signs. (1) It is unlawful to use, place or erect any signboard, sign, billboard, bulletin board, post, pole or device of any kind of advertising in any park; or to attach any notice, bill, poster, sign, wire, rod or cord to any tree, shrub, railing, post or structure in any park; or, without the written consent of the Director, to place or erect in any park a structure of any kind. (2) Provided, upon approval of the Director, temporary directional signs or decorations on occasions of public celebration and picnics may be erected in City parks. (3) Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes a class 3 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.050.] Section 2. That Section 9.100.100, entitled “Animals” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.100 Animals. (1) It is unlawful for any person to ride a horse or other beast of burden upon any park property unless specifically designated for such or without specific permission of the Director. (2) It is unlawful for any person to allow or permit any animal to be at large in any park, except dog guides or service animals, as defined in Chapter 70.84 RCW (“white cane law”), or those animals used by a law enforcement officer; provided, that except in areas in which animals are Page 48 of 53 Omnibus Ordinance - 2 prohibited, animals are permitted in a park if on a leash not greater than 10 feet in length, or otherwise securely caged or securely restrained. (3) The Director may ban dogs and other pets from areas of any park where the Director determines it appropriate. (4) Any person with any animal in his or her possession in any park shall be responsible for the conduct of the animal and shall not allow the animal to bite or otherwise molest or annoy other park visitors. (5) Any person with an animal in his or her possession in any park shall carry equipment for removing fecal matter, and shall collect and place fecal matter deposited by such animal in an appropriate receptacle. (6) Notwithstanding subsection (2) of this section, the Director may designate certain areas in parks as allowing dogs and/or other pets to be off leash. (7) Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 3 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.080.] Section 3. That Section 9.100.120, entitled “Feeding animals” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.120 Feeding animals. It is unlawful in any manner to feed any fowl, farm animals or wildlife, except at areas designated by the Director for such purposes. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 3 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.100.] Section 4. That Section 9.100.130, entitled “Commercial activity” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.130 Commercial activity. It is unlawful to sell refreshments or merchandise or service, or conduct commercial solicitations in any park, without the permission of the Director, or without a concession contract with the City. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 2 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.120.] Section 5. That Section 9.100.140, entitled “Parking for certain purposes prohibited” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.140 Parking for certain purposes prohibited. (1) No person shall park any vehicle in any park for the principal purpose of: Page 49 of 53 Omnibus Ordinance - 3 (a) Displaying of commercial or noncommercial signs; or (b) Displaying such vehicle for sale. (2) No person shall park any vehicle in any park for the principal purpose of washing, greasing, or repairing such vehicle except repairs necessitated by an emergency. (3) All parking shall be in designated areas only. (4) Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 3 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.170.] Section 6. That Section 9.100.150, entitled “Restrictions on vehicles” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.150 Restrictions on vehicles. It is unlawful to ride or drive any motorcycle, motor vehicle, motorized foot scooter, horse or pony over or through any park or on any trail except along and upon the park drives, parkways, or designated parking areas and on such trails as may be designated for motor vehicle or equestrian use, or to stand or park any vehicle, except in areas designated by the Director. This restriction shall not apply to any disabled person utilizing an electric assisted bicycle, a power wheelchair or a wheelchair conveyance as defined by RCW Title 46. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 2 civil infraction. [Ord. 3727 § 2, 2005; Ord. 3673 § 1, 2004; Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.180.] Section 7. That Section 9.100.160, entitled “Skateboarding” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.160 Skateboarding. Unless otherwise posted, it is unlawful to use skateboards, in-line skates, roller skates, or bicycles on tennis courts and stages. It is unlawful to use skateboards, in-line skates, roller skates, or bicycles in any other area of a park if so posted. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 3 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.190.] Section 8. That Section 9.100.170, entitled “Noise” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.170 Noise. (1) No person shall, without prior written approval of the Director or authorized parks department employee, cause or allow to be emitted noise in a park which: Exceeds the maximum permissible noise levels set forth in Chapter 9.130 PMC; including, but not limited to: Page 50 of 53 Omnibus Ordinance - 4 (a) Any sound made by the unamplified human voice which emanates from a building, structure or property between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and is received within a residential district. (b) Any sound made by speaker sound amplifier or motor vehicle audio system exterior to the passenger sitting compartment of a motor vehicle on a public street or highway (anywhere within the right-of-right thereof) of a commercial radio station broadcast, or music from an audio tape cassette, compact disc, or other recording medium. (c) Any sound from a motor vehicle audio system such as tape players, radios, and compact disc players, operated at a volume and under conditions so as to be audible greater than 75 feet from the vehicle itself. (d) Any sound from portable audio equipment, such as a radio, tape player or compact disc player, which is operated at such a volume so as to be audible at a distance of 75 feet or more from the source of the sound. (2) Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 3 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.200.] Section 9. That Section 9.100.180, entitled “Remote control models, hang gliders, hot air balloons” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.180 Remote control models, hang gliders, hot air balloons. It is unlawful to operate any remote control and/or motorized model aircraft, rocket, watercraft or similar device in any park, or to launch or land any hang glider or hot air balloon, except at places set apart by the Director for such purposes or as authorized by a permit from the Director. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 2 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.210.] Section 10. That Section 9.100.190, entitled “Trail use” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.190 Trail use. It is unlawful for any person to travel on a trail at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions and having regard to actual and potential hazards. In every event, speed shall be so controlled as may be necessary to avoid colliding with others who are complying with the law and using reasonable care. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 1 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.230.] Section 11. That Section 9.100.200, entitled “Golfing, baseball, swimming, etc.” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: Page 51 of 53 Omnibus Ordinance - 5 9.100.200 Golfing, baseball, swimming, etc. It is unlawful to practice or play golf, baseball, cricket, lacrosse, polo, archery, hockey, or similar games employing hard or dangerous objects except at places set apart for such purposes. It is unlawful to swim in any area where signs prohibiting swimming are posted or within 100 feet of a public dock, ramp, intake structure or navigational aid. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 1 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.240.] Section 12. That Section 9.100.220, entitled “Littering” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.220 Littering. No person shall leave, deposit, drop or scatter any bottles, broken glass, ashes, paper, plastic containers, cans or other rubbish, litter or refuse in any City park except in a garbage can or other receptacle designated for such purposes. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 2 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.250.] Section 13. That Section 9.100.230, entitled “Building fires” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.230 Building fires. It is unlawful to build any fires in any park except in areas so designated. Violation of any of the provisions of this section constitutes an class 1 civil infraction. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.260.] Section 14. That Section 9.100.240, entitled “Overnight camping” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.240 Overnight camping. Overnight camping is prohibited on park property except by written permission of the Director. A violation of this section is a class 2 civil infraction. Each day or partial day of violation shall constitute a separate violation. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Code 1970 § 9.48.270.] Section 15. That Section 9.100.260, entitled “Infraction penalties” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.260 Infraction penalties. Penalties for infractions included in this chapter shall be those penalty amounts as set forth in the Infraction Rules for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction, Rule 6.2(d)(3), Parks and Recreation, as amended, for violations of similar provisions of the Washington Administrative Code PMC 1.05.080. Any infraction not otherwise specifically identified by class shall be a class 2 civil infraction. [Code 1970 § 9.48.300.] Page 52 of 53 Omnibus Ordinance - 6 Section 16. That Section 9.100.270, entitled “Penalty for violations” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.100.270 Penalty for misdemeanor violations. Unless otherwise provided, aAny person found guilty of violating any of the provisions or failing to comply with any of the mandatory requirements of this chapter shall be guilty of identified as a misdemeanor shall be subject to punishments as provided in PMC 9.01.080. [Ord. 3616 § 1, 2003; Ord. 3052 § 3, 1994; Ord. 1326 § 3, 1968; Code 1970 § 9.48.310.] Section 17. This Ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after its approval, passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as provided by law this ____ day of _______________, 2020. _____________________________ Saul Martinez Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ ____________________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorney Published: ____________________ Page 53 of 53